I hope Marvel will ask Ben Affleck if he is interested in directing a DD reboot, since he is/was a big fan of the character.

__________________"I know I'm asking a lot, but the price of freedom is high, it always has been, and it's a price I'm willing to pay. And if I'm the only one, then so be it. But I'm willing to bet I'm not." - Captain America

My dream team would be Fincher directing Hall. But Fincher would never do this.

Fincher would've requested that DD be set in its own universe if he takes on the job, and be given complete control, which Marvel won't have given it to him. Not that he will actually be interested in the first place since he doesn't seemed to want to direct a superhero movie.

__________________"I know I'm asking a lot, but the price of freedom is high, it always has been, and it's a price I'm willing to pay. And if I'm the only one, then so be it. But I'm willing to bet I'm not." - Captain America

Like Hugh Laurie, Gandolfini, Kyra Sedgwick et al, Hall is a tv star not a leading man on the big screen. Fincher directing a Marvel movie is more likely than Hall ever starring in a big budget superhero movie. great actor though.

Like Hugh Laurie, Gandolfini, Kyra Sedgwick et al, Hall is a tv star not a leading man on the big screen. Fincher directing a Marvel movie is more likely than Hall ever starring in a big budget superhero movie. great actor though.

What about George Clooney? Will Smith? Bruce Willis? Let's not forget how a good number of SNL alums have made some big movies. Sure, it's rare for TV actors to make the leap, but it does happen.

George Clooney was considered a "hunk" since day one. Will Smith was a rapper before Fresh Prince and was still a young man when he crossed over to films. Bruce Willis did one tv show - a show that highlighted his strengths as a potential leading man - and then went straight into movies where he had a megahit in Die Hard. The SNL example is "apples and oranges" and therefore irrelevant.

Michael Hall isnt a movie star, and nothing about his work on Dexter suggests he ever will be. He could get "character actor" work in films, sure. In fact, he almost certainly will once Dexter is over. Or he can star in moderately budgeted niche films. But the idea that hes gonna be the next big action star is ludicrous. 0% chance that happening. Not dissing the guy cuz hes very good on an otherwise mediocre show. And he was great on Six Feet Under. He simply doesnt have the face or the resume for it. And hes like 42, so that kind of "buzz" would have already happened. It hasnt.

I understand "fantasy" choices for certain roles, but reality is what it is.

The upcoming movie Kill Your Darlings is exactly the kind of movie I expect from Hall going forward. Plus supporting work in bigger productions. To me, that's a great career. Hes talented enough that he will always get work I think.

George Clooney was considered a "hunk" since day one. Will Smith was a rapper before Fresh Prince and was still a young man when he crossed over to films. Bruce Willis did one tv show - a show that highlighted his strengths as a potential leading man - and then went straight into movies where he had a megahit in Die Hard. The SNL example is "apples and oranges" and therefore irrelevant.

Michael Hall isnt a movie star, and nothing about his work on Dexter suggests he ever will be. He could get "character actor" work in films, sure. In fact, he almost certainly will once Dexter is over. Or he can star in moderately budgeted niche films. But the idea that hes gonna be the next big action star is ludicrous. 0% chance that happening. Not dissing the guy cuz hes very good on an otherwise mediocre show. And he was great on Six Feet Under. He simply doesnt have the face or the resume for it. And hes like 42, so that kind of "buzz" would have already happened. It hasnt.

I understand "fantasy" choices for certain roles, but reality is what it is.

The upcoming movie Kill Your Darlings is exactly the kind of movie I expect from Hall going forward. Plus supporting work in bigger productions. To me, that's a great career. Hes talented enough that he will always get work I think.

Let me point you to two actors who were known for "their character work" and were, until recently, pegged to be in "moderately budgeted niche films" for the rest of their acting careers. "The idea that [they were] gonna be the next big action star [was] ludicrous." Their names are Mark Ruffalo and Jeremy Renner. And when Renner got his "big break" in the Hurt Locker, he was already in his 40s.

Whether or not Michael C. Hall or any other lead TV actor makes the leap into big-budget films, what I'm trying to say is that you cannot be so incredibly certain in writing someone off just because of his/her resume.

Now who should be the villain in the next DD movie? Should they have Kingpin and Bullseye again or someone else? Should they have Kingpin again, but with a different enforcer and save Bullseye for a sequel?

Now who should be the villain in the next DD movie? Should they have Kingpin and Bullseye again or someone else? Should they have Kingpin again, but with a different enforcer and save Bullseye for a sequel?

No Kingpin, no Bullseye.

He trains under Stick during the first act, dons the costume in the second & faces The Owl in the third. Kingpin gets revealed in the end.

He trains under Stick during the first act, dons the costume in the second & faces The Owl in the third. Kingpin gets revealed in the end.

Second movie you go full out Kingpin & bring in Bullseye.

Is Owl a compelling enough villain to carry a movie though? He always come across as a Big Bad wannabe rather then a true Big Bad in the comics nowadays. How many great Owl stories have there been? I don't think Owl has been that interesting, I think he would work best in a gang war story with the Kingpin.

I guess I can always dream of an R-rated Fincher-directed DD film starring Michael C. Hall, Michael Rooker as The Owl & James Gandolfini as Kingpin.

Me too. My dream of Born Again won't happen now. R-rated, authentic New York grittiness where you can smell the garbage, puke, urine and stale street falafel on screen. Knuckle breaking action and violence.

Is Owl a compelling enough villain to carry a movie though? He always come across as a Big Bad wannabe rather then a true Big Bad in the comics nowadays. How many great Owl stories have there been? I don't think Owl has been that interesting, I think he would work best in a gang war story with the Kingpin.

I think the first arc was the best, though it would require some heavy grounding.

The guy's basically a training tool for DD to prepare for Kingpin. He's menacing & powerful enough to make for a good first foe.

Michael C. Hall isnt a movie star, and nothing about his work on Dexter suggests he ever will be. He could get "character actor" work in films, sure. In fact, he almost certainly will once Dexter is over. Or he can star in moderately budgeted niche films. But the idea that hes gonna be the next big action star is ludicrous. 0% chance that happening. Not dissing the guy cuz hes very good on an otherwise mediocre show. And he was great on Six Feet Under. He simply doesnt have the face or the resume for it. And hes like 42, so that kind of "buzz" would have already happened. It hasnt.

WOW.

You really underestimate MCH.

To add insult to injury, you think he doesn't have "the face" to be an action star yet Chris Pine is a worthy candidate for DD. Sighs.

Jose Padilha, the brilliant mind behind the ELITE SQUAD films wanted MCH for ROBOCOP. His second choice was Fassbender.

Not only does Hall's face have tremendous charisma & ruggedness, but his acting abilities are fantastic.

What really shocks me about your rant against Hall & DEXTER is that if tomorrow the writers decided to make Dexter blind & equipped him with sonar senses - the show becomes DAREDEVIL.

The themes that make DD interesting have been explored on Dexter countless times.

I agree that some actors due to restrictions in acting range/looks will never translate well from TV to film. Michael C. Hall ain't one of them.

Doesn't Sony own the rights to the Kingpin? Didn't Arad say back in July that he was on loan to Fox?

I question the accuracy of that statement actually. Because if Kingpin is Sony's based on the logic that he first appeared in a Spider-Man comic then Wolverine Belongs to Marvel (first appeared in a Hulk comic not X-Men) and Black Panther belongs to Fox (first appeared in Fantastic Four). Daredevil is a primary DD Villain so It should have been with that package. All the loan talk is weird because I never remembered seeing "Kingpin appearance courtesy of Sony Pictures" in the credits at the end of DD